I'm going to give you another example. I was on a 20 million dollar project. I reported to the project manager that the data conversion effort from legacy to new system was about 10% complete, and way behind, rather than 90% complete, where it should have been. He wanted to bury his head, because of deliverables and other pressures and called me an alarmist.

I was right. He lost his job. The company had to go back to the client for more money.

All of this would have been avoided, to a degree, if the project manager had the guts to escalate the problems. It didn't happen. He paid the price.

This is typical in ANY software development. Deliverables, money, pressure, lack of guts to say, "this isn't ready".

Tarhunnas, when alpha or beta testing, you can't be nice. You have to be honest. Judging by WITE, a number of people believe that the game should be historical, to a fault. As a result, there's a lot of faults. Honest, wait, we need to think of this as a game, feedback, didn't seem to happen.

I'm a developer. I build based on what I think the user needs. I often don't believe the user, even if it's not really working. It needs some serious honesty to break through. Why? Because I put a sh@tload of work into it, and don't feel like redoing it. I have deliverables. I have other work. My company doesn't want to lose money because I have to rework. This is basic system design 101.

If Pelton has found exploits in the WITW, then let him express it, without velvet gloves. Velvet gloves will not get the game fixed.

Pelton is a very good player, probably among the best, and he certainly should point out any exploits and bugs he has found. However, I do think he shold avoid calling the testers "a lamo bunch" just because they didn't find every loophole or exploit. As far as I understand, a number of points made in this forum was also pointed out by the testers. The designers take various design decisions, for various reasons, and good or bad, it is hardly the testers fault.